'But there are other difficulties in the way of immediate emancipation. We believe that no one, who has taken charge of an infant, and made a cripple of him, either in his feet, his hands, or his mind, so that when he is of mature age, he is unable to take care of himself, has a right to turn him out of doors, to perish or destroy himself, and call it, giving him his liberty. After having reduced him to this condition, he is bound to afford him the support and protection, which he has rendered necessary. 'This appears to us to be the true relation of the southern planters to their slaves. Not that the southern planters have generally been guilty of personal cruelty; but such has been the general result of the system acted upon, and such the relation growing out of it. The slaves have grown up, under the eye of their masters, unable to take care of themselves; and their masters, for whose comfort and convenience this has been done, are bound to provide for them. 'Nor do we think that the exhortation, to "do right and trust Providence," applies at all to this case; for the very question is, "what is right?" Would it be right for the slave merchant, in the midst of the Atlantic, to knock the manacles from his prisoners and throw them overboard, and call this, giving them their liberty and trusting Providence with the result? But how else could he reduce the doctrine of immediate and complete emancipation to practice?'--[Vermont Chronicle.]